Al Franken......WHOOPS....Next to go....

Here's the thing, there's photographic evidence of franken being a creep. There's no such similar evidence in the moore case. If someone was simply
saying franken did this, with no evidence, I'd back franken up.

Well there is the physical evidence of the yearbook from the girl he supposedly signed.

If that is his signature, we know he lied about not knowing her, and for me that would be enough to at least show he is lying about these situations
and is likely guilty of some of it.

But for some reason, that womans lawyer, Gloria Allred, wont just release the yearbook for analysis.

That doesn't matter--sleeping, living human beings shouldn't be used against their consent for comedic props portraying sexual assault, either. In any
event, did you read the extent of her claims as to what Franken did? It's more than just in the picture, although that seems to be the only evidence
that we have at the moment.

Also, I would challenge the certainty that you claim that he isn't touching her...it cold go either way, from what I'm looking at in the zoomed in
image.

Regardless, this isn't about proven illegalities as much as whether or not this is behavior that should be dismissed simply because he was a
"comedian" at the time and just because he's a senator now.

With most cases of sexual assault, it's a he-said-she-said issue that never really can be resolved with evidence. At least in this one, we have visual
evidence that, at the very, very least, Franken regarded here as just a prop for a funny sexual photo op against her will.

I'm not nearly as willing to dismiss that as you seem to apparently be.

Is it in poor taste? Sure.

I'm not sure what theocratic country you guys live in, but when a woman tells someone to stop and they stop, that's usually the end of it.

That doesn't matter--sleeping, living human beings shouldn't be used against their consent for comedic props portraying sexual assault, either. In any
event, did you read the extent of her claims as to what Franken did? It's more than just in the picture, although that seems to be the only evidence
that we have at the moment.

Also, I would challenge the certainty that you claim that he isn't touching her...it cold go either way, from what I'm looking at in the zoomed in
image.

Regardless, this isn't about proven illegalities as much as whether or not this is behavior that should be dismissed simply because he was a
"comedian" at the time and just because he's a senator now.

With most cases of sexual assault, it's a he-said-she-said issue that never really can be resolved with evidence. At least in this one, we have visual
evidence that, at the very, very least, Franken regarded here as just a prop for a funny sexual photo op against her will.

I'm not nearly as willing to dismiss that as you seem to apparently be.

Is it in poor taste? Sure.

I'm not sure what theocratic country you guys live in, but when a woman tells someone to stop and they stop, that's usually the end of it.

That's it.

But, there's no excuse for deliberate sexual assault on a minor.

Attempts to compare this to Moore is desperation.

But bringing up ancient accusations when it is politically expedient to do so is just as unjust. There are reasons we have statutes of limitations.

And I don't know if you understand where I'm coming from, but I've aided in the prosecution and punishment of many sexual assault cases, so I fully
grasp the concept AND legal definitions of what sexual assault is.

Just because someone says "stop" after the fact, and the guy stops, doesn't mean the action that occurred prior isn't sexual assault.

And who are "you guys?" I'm just one man. And I live in America. And I'm an atheist.

You didn't really hit the nail on the head there...at all.

ETA: And statutes of limitations don't negate the ability (and responsibility, IMO) of someone to publicly speak out against a crime committed, even
if it's no longer prosecutable.

Not only the yearbook issue, but didn't one of the accusers during a press conference call him "Ray" and not Roy, and had to be corrected by the
attorney? So they forgot or got confused on who touched them inappropriately?

originally posted by: Willtell
YOU CANT GET ON THIS GUY…HE'S A LIBERAL--BACK OFF!

Just joking

Look liberals, don’t start defending this guy because he’s a liberal, lets not be like them—the conservatives..

If and when they get exposed we have to have the same standard on them as the conservatives

Well I am glad you arec consistent, thats good.

But don't speak for liberals as a whole.

Show me similar coverage by left leaning outlets of politicians about Menedez, who is a democratic senator currently on trial for having sex with
underagers.

Hmm...

Seems like democrats have a far different standard when it comes to how to treat Moore as opposed to Menedez.

his name is spelled Menendez, not Menedez...and you lie about what he did...play for pay corruption, not sex with underagers....and if he is guilty of
corruption, this democrat (me) says throw him out on his ass, period.

originally posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein
Al is just joking around. No one got hurt, no one was touched.
Al is one of the good guys, not a swamp creature like Moore or Weinstien or Spacey.
And it hurts us all, no matter whose side you are on. I mean, I feel like suing Spacey over not being able to see the next season of House of Cards.

originally posted by: Willtell
YOU CANT GET ON THIS GUY…HE'S A LIBERAL--BACK OFF!

Just joking

Look liberals, don’t start defending this guy because he’s a liberal, lets not be like them—the conservatives..

If and when they get exposed we have to have the same standard on them as the conservatives

Well I am glad you arec consistent, thats good.

But don't speak for liberals as a whole.

Show me similar coverage by left leaning outlets of politicians about Menedez, who is a democratic senator currently on trial for having sex with
underagers.

Hmm...

Seems like democrats have a far different standard when it comes to how to treat Moore as opposed to Menedez.

his name is spelled Menendez, not Menedez...and you lie about what he did...play for pay corruption, not sex with underagers....and if he is guilty of
corruption, this democrat (me) says throw him out on his ass, period.

Must have missed this.

Prosecutors defended their inquiry of Mr. Menendez in vehement terms, including a review of what they called “specific, corroborated allegations
that defendants Menendez and Melgen had sex with underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic.” They said the Justice Department’s Child
Exploitation and Obscenity Section had scrutinized Mr. Menendez and Dr. Melgen, even as they repeatedly acknowledged that Mr. Menendez was not
indicted in connection with the initial allegations against him.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.